Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Three strikes and static internet addresses

Reply
Thread Tools

Three strikes and static internet addresses

 
 
peterwn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-02-2011
See:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/di...hit-easy-shots

"TelstraClear spokesman Gary Bowering did not believe its customers
were at more risk of receiving notices, as copyright owners had no way
of knowing whether a particular IP address was static or dynamically
generated. "

I am sorry Gary, but while TelstraClear may not confirm which blocks
of IP addresses are 'static' or 'dynamic', those involved with 3
strikes monitoring will soon get a shrewd idea which blocks of IP
addresses are likely to be 'static'. For example their employees can
'harvest' inhome static addresses from friends, etc and a dozen or so
addresses from each of Wellington and Christchurch will enable the
address blocks to be determined with adequate accuracy (one static
address indicates 252 other static addresses and two addresses 3-4
blocks apart would indicate the intervening blocks are likely to be
static).

In addition if the same IP address 'strikes' twice there is a
reasonable probability that it is 'static'.

Once the copyright enforcement agencies are aware of the static IP
ranges, it makes sense to target abusers with these addresses as they
potentially get a much higher 'return' for their $25 they pay to the
IP provider.

So Telstraclear inhome cable customers will soon be like fish in a
barrel with the new rules.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
victor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-02-2011
On 3/11/2011 9:54 a.m., peterwn wrote:
> See:
> http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/di...hit-easy-shots
>
> "TelstraClear spokesman Gary Bowering did not believe its customers
> were at more risk of receiving notices, as copyright owners had no way
> of knowing whether a particular IP address was static or dynamically
> generated. "
>
> I am sorry Gary, but while TelstraClear may not confirm which blocks
> of IP addresses are 'static' or 'dynamic', those involved with 3
> strikes monitoring will soon get a shrewd idea which blocks of IP
> addresses are likely to be 'static'. For example their employees can
> 'harvest' inhome static addresses from friends, etc and a dozen or so
> addresses from each of Wellington and Christchurch will enable the
> address blocks to be determined with adequate accuracy (one static
> address indicates 252 other static addresses and two addresses 3-4
> blocks apart would indicate the intervening blocks are likely to be
> static).
>
> In addition if the same IP address 'strikes' twice there is a
> reasonable probability that it is 'static'.
>
> Once the copyright enforcement agencies are aware of the static IP
> ranges, it makes sense to target abusers with these addresses as they
> potentially get a much higher 'return' for their $25 they pay to the
> IP provider.
>
> So Telstraclear inhome cable customers will soon be like fish in a
> barrel with the new rules.



I don't see what the benefit to the record company is of getting their
Rihanna fans cut off from the internet, they are the most likely to buy
their legit product when they do have money. It isn't anything but
window dressing.
Regular heavy torrent users are more likely downloading tv series
unavailable or not yet available in NZ.
I suspect that those users will shift from peer to peer to client server
download methods like premium nntp providers with SSL encryption or file
hosting services like Rapidshare via VPN services.
I don't think that the content providers who issue notices will
discriminate by ISP, the identification of the customer has to be done
by the ISP for no matter what their method of IP number allocation is.
And if there does prove to be some bias, any static addressed TC cable
customers who do get served with a final notice will churn to ADSL
providers.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bruce Sinclair
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-03-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, peterwn <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>See:
>http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/di...ar-may-hit-eas
>y-shots
>
>"TelstraClear spokesman Gary Bowering did not believe its customers
>were at more risk of receiving notices, as copyright owners had no way
>of knowing whether a particular IP address was static or dynamically
>generated. "
>
>I am sorry Gary, but while TelstraClear may not confirm which blocks
>of IP addresses are 'static' or 'dynamic', those involved with 3
>strikes monitoring will soon get a shrewd idea which blocks of IP
>addresses are likely to be 'static'. For example their employees can
>'harvest' inhome static addresses from friends, etc and a dozen or so
>addresses from each of Wellington and Christchurch will enable the
>address blocks to be determined with adequate accuracy (one static
>address indicates 252 other static addresses and two addresses 3-4
>blocks apart would indicate the intervening blocks are likely to be
>static).
>
>In addition if the same IP address 'strikes' twice there is a
>reasonable probability that it is 'static'.
>
>Once the copyright enforcement agencies are aware of the static IP
>ranges, it makes sense to target abusers with these addresses as they
>potentially get a much higher 'return' for their $25 they pay to the
>IP provider.
>
>So Telstraclear inhome cable customers will soon be like fish in a
>barrel with the new rules.


... or have you missed the point here ? ... perhaps they are saying that
they can't so they don't have to, thus avoiding the law in all its
stupidity. ?

 
Reply With Quote
 
peterwn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-03-2011
On Nov 3, 11:08*am, victor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I don't see what the benefit to the record company is of getting their
> Rihanna fans cut off from the internet, they are the most likely to buy
> their legit product when they do have money. It isn't anything but
> window dressing.
> Regular heavy torrent users are more likely downloading tv series
> unavailable or not yet available in NZ.
> I suspect that those users will shift from peer to peer to client server
> download methods like premium nntp providers with SSL encryption or file
> hosting services like Rapidshare via VPN services.

Irrevelant to the topic at hand.
> I don't think that the content providers who issue notices will
> discriminate by ISP, the identification of the customer has to be done
> by the ISP for no matter what their method of IP number allocation is.

If I was in their shoes, I damn well would. I would want the biggest
bang for each 25 buck notice sent out and I would achieve this by
ideftifying and targeting static IP addresses.

> And if there does prove to be some bias, any static addressed TC cable
> customers who do get served with a final notice will churn to ADSL
> providers.

You must be kidding, mate. TelstraClear inhome (where available)
currently offers the fastest internet available to average households.
Its users would be addicted to it in the same way as a 'mainline'
heroin addict.

 
Reply With Quote
 
peterwn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-03-2011
On Nov 3, 1:25*pm, (E-Mail Removed)
(Bruce Sinclair) wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)..com>, peterwn <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >See:
> >http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/di...1/Piracy-war-m...
> >y-shots

>
> >"TelstraClear spokesman Gary Bowering did not believe its customers
> >were at more risk of receiving notices, as copyright owners had no way
> >of knowing whether a particular IP address was static or dynamically
> >generated. "

>
> >I am sorry Gary, but while TelstraClear may not confirm which blocks
> >of IP addresses are 'static' or 'dynamic', those involved with 3
> >strikes monitoring will soon get a shrewd idea which blocks of IP
> >addresses are likely to be 'static'. For example their employees can
> >'harvest' inhome static addresses from friends, etc and a dozen or so
> >addresses from each of Wellington and Christchurch will enable the
> >address blocks to be determined with adequate accuracy (one static
> >address indicates 252 other static addresses and two addresses 3-4
> >blocks apart would indicate the intervening blocks are likely to be
> >static).

>
> >In addition if the same IP address 'strikes' twice there is a
> >reasonable probability that it is 'static'.

>
> >Once the copyright enforcement agencies are aware of the static IP
> >ranges, it makes sense to target abusers with these addresses as *they
> >potentially get a much higher 'return' for their $25 they pay to the
> >IP provider.

>
> >So Telstraclear inhome cable customers will soon be like fish in a
> >barrel with the new rules.

>
> .. or have you missed the point here ? ... perhaps they are saying that
> they can't so they don't have to, thus avoiding the law in all its
> stupidity. ?

I do not think I have missed any point. As I said even if TelstraClear
refuses to disclose its static IP address blocks, those who are doing
the copyright enforcing will soon get wind of them anyway.

Possibly if TelstraClear runs out of its blocks of IP addresses they
may convert 'static' to 'dynamic' addresses. If they merely changed to
'dynamic' to help shield customers, the copyright lawyers could well
have them on toast for aiding copyright breach and proof would be on
balance of probabilities.
 
Reply With Quote
 
victor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-03-2011
On 3/11/2011 3:21 p.m., peterwn wrote:
> On Nov 3, 11:08 am, victor<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I don't see what the benefit to the record company is of getting their
>> Rihanna fans cut off from the internet, they are the most likely to buy
>> their legit product when they do have money. It isn't anything but
>> window dressing.
>> Regular heavy torrent users are more likely downloading tv series
>> unavailable or not yet available in NZ.
>> I suspect that those users will shift from peer to peer to client server
>> download methods like premium nntp providers with SSL encryption or file
>> hosting services like Rapidshare via VPN services.

> Irrevelant to the topic at hand.
>> I don't think that the content providers who issue notices will
>> discriminate by ISP, the identification of the customer has to be done
>> by the ISP for no matter what their method of IP number allocation is.

> If I was in their shoes, I damn well would. I would want the biggest
> bang for each 25 buck notice sent out and I would achieve this by
> ideftifying and targeting static IP addresses.


That wouldn't achieve their objective, which is to reduce p2p file
sharing by the most publicity with the least expenditure.
That means making as large a public display to all the major ISPs as
possible.

>
>> And if there does prove to be some bias, any static addressed TC cable
>> customers who do get served with a final notice will churn to ADSL
>> providers.

> You must be kidding, mate. TelstraClear inhome (where available)
> currently offers the fastest internet available to average households.
> Its users would be addicted to it in the same way as a 'mainline'
> heroin addict.
>

Those users, if they intend to carry on downloading, which was already
copyright infringement before the Skynet, will have already consulted
the various forums about alternatives to bit torrent, and possibly
decided they can get better bang for their buck from other services.

There are a bunch of lawyers and consultants who make a fortune from
encouraging this pointless whack a mole charade though.

You would think from all the grandstanding speeches about supporting our
artists and the losses to our creative industries that they would be
issuing notices for pirating of Kiwi artists, not persecuting the
parents of 13 year olds that like Rihanna or Lady Gaga on their phones.
It hardly matters what sort of connection you have for this level of
infringement.


 
Reply With Quote
 
victor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-03-2011
On 3/11/2011 3:30 p.m., peterwn wrote:
> On Nov 3, 1:25 pm, (E-Mail Removed)
> (Bruce Sinclair) wrote:
>> In article<(E-Mail Removed)>, peterwn<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> See:
>>> http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/di...1/Piracy-war-m...
>>> y-shots

>>
>>> "TelstraClear spokesman Gary Bowering did not believe its customers
>>> were at more risk of receiving notices, as copyright owners had no way
>>> of knowing whether a particular IP address was static or dynamically
>>> generated. "

>>
>>> I am sorry Gary, but while TelstraClear may not confirm which blocks
>>> of IP addresses are 'static' or 'dynamic', those involved with 3
>>> strikes monitoring will soon get a shrewd idea which blocks of IP
>>> addresses are likely to be 'static'. For example their employees can
>>> 'harvest' inhome static addresses from friends, etc and a dozen or so
>>> addresses from each of Wellington and Christchurch will enable the
>>> address blocks to be determined with adequate accuracy (one static
>>> address indicates 252 other static addresses and two addresses 3-4
>>> blocks apart would indicate the intervening blocks are likely to be
>>> static).

>>
>>> In addition if the same IP address 'strikes' twice there is a
>>> reasonable probability that it is 'static'.

>>
>>> Once the copyright enforcement agencies are aware of the static IP
>>> ranges, it makes sense to target abusers with these addresses as they
>>> potentially get a much higher 'return' for their $25 they pay to the
>>> IP provider.

>>
>>> So Telstraclear inhome cable customers will soon be like fish in a
>>> barrel with the new rules.

>>
>> .. or have you missed the point here ? ... perhaps they are saying that
>> they can't so they don't have to, thus avoiding the law in all its
>> stupidity. ?

> I do not think I have missed any point. As I said even if TelstraClear
> refuses to disclose its static IP address blocks, those who are doing
> the copyright enforcing will soon get wind of them anyway.
>
> Possibly if TelstraClear runs out of its blocks of IP addresses they
> may convert 'static' to 'dynamic' addresses. If they merely changed to
> 'dynamic' to help shield customers, the copyright lawyers could well
> have them on toast for aiding copyright breach and proof would be on
> balance of probabilities.


http://3strikes.net.nz/information/faqs


Do copyright owners get my name and address from my Internet Service
Provider?
No. Even if you challenge a notice from your Internet Service Provider,
they will remove your personal information before passing it on the
copyright owner. Your Internet Service Provider has to provide your
(i.e. the account holder’s) name and contact details to the Copyright
Tribunal when directed by the Tribunal.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce Sinclair
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-03-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, peterwn <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Nov 3, 1:25=A0pm, (E-Mail Removed)
>(Bruce Sinclair) wrote:

(snip)
>> >So Telstraclear inhome cable customers will soon be like fish in a
>> >barrel with the new rules.

>> .. or have you missed the point here ? ... perhaps they are saying that
>> they can't so they don't have to, thus avoiding the law in all its
>> stupidity. ?

>I do not think I have missed any point. As I said even if TelstraClear
>refuses to disclose its static IP address blocks, those who are doing
>the copyright enforcing will soon get wind of them anyway.
>
>Possibly if TelstraClear runs out of its blocks of IP addresses they
>may convert 'static' to 'dynamic' addresses. If they merely changed to
>'dynamic' to help shield customers, the copyright lawyers could well
>have them on toast for aiding copyright breach and proof would be on
>balance of probabilities.


The law allows anything not explicitly prohibited. I don't remember seeing
anything in that law about static vs dynamic ... either one being allowed
and one not or changing between one or the other being prohibited. If that
is so, a company swapping it's customers to dynamic is allowed, as would be
a customer choosing that option.

IANAL of course, but that seems simple to me.

It's bad law through and through of course, so the chances of it being
extended could well be high ?

<sigh>






 
Reply With Quote
 
peterwn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-03-2011
On Nov 3, 4:41*pm, victor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> http://3strikes.net.nz/information/faqs
>
> Do copyright owners get my name and address from my Internet Service
> Provider?
> No. Even if you challenge a notice from your Internet Service Provider,
> they will remove your personal information before passing it on the
> copyright owner. Your Internet Service Provider has to provide your
> (i.e. the account holder’s) name and contact details to the Copyright
> Tribunal when directed by the Tribunal.

Does not matter. If a static IP address infringes thrice (assuming
distinct occasions), the enforcer can hit a guaranteed home run for 3x
$25.
 
Reply With Quote
 
peterwn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-03-2011
On Nov 3, 4:54*pm, (E-Mail Removed)
(Bruce Sinclair) wrote:
>
> >Possibly if TelstraClear runs out of its blocks of IP addresses they
> >may convert 'static' to 'dynamic' addresses. If they merely changed to
> >'dynamic' to help shield customers, the copyright lawyers could well
> >have them on toast for aiding copyright breach and proof would be on
> >balance of probabilities.

>
> The law allows anything not explicitly prohibited.

Criminal law, yes. With respect to non-criminal matters and sanctions,
the law is not as simple as that. With copyright, criminal sanctions
are only enlivened for 'commercial' type breaches - eg pirating and
selling CD's at a flea market. Non-criminal sanctions (which can still
hit the wallet in a big way) are available for other breaches.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Three strikes and your city gets reconstructed? William Brown NZ Computing 0 04-14-2011 05:01 AM
Three Strikes Law Frank Williams NZ Computing 5 03-11-2010 07:40 AM
Re: Three Mobile --> Skype on three (Non-three [Symbian - Nokia] handsets) Harry Stottle UK VOIP 0 01-05-2010 08:59 AM
Three Strikes and you are out, Judge says so, not ISP. Gordon NZ Computing 10 07-09-2009 10:46 AM
Three strikes, you're out Nik Coughlin NZ Computing 2 10-14-2008 07:02 AM



Advertisments